Canadian snowbirds caught up in new registration requirements

Another example of the risk of doing things quickly without considering the impact (hallmark of the Trump administration):

An estimated one million Canadian “snowbirds” – seniors and retirees who winter in southern states such as Florida and Arizona – inject billions in tourism spending during their months-long stays in the United States. But under an executive order from President Donald Trump, these visitors will soon have to register to travel south of the border, as part of an effort to curb illegal immigration.

Mr. Trump’s order, called Protecting the American People Against Invasion, is believed to be the first time in history that the United States has included Canadians in a crackdown on undocumented migrants. Immigration lawyers in the U.S. said the order targets the wrong people and will further hurt the disintegrating Canada-U.S. relationship.

“Our immigration house is on fire, and we’re worried about the curtains,” said Rosanna Berardi, an immigration lawyer in Buffalo. “This is just stupid. This is picking on people that are coming as snowbirds. They own property here. They pay taxes. They are higher-level income earners. They spend a lot of money in the U.S. They are not part of the immigration problem.”

The order, issued by Mr. Trump the evening he took office, has received little attention amid the chaotic first weeks of a presidency dominated by tariff threats and orders that have isolated the U.S. from its allies. It requires all “aliens” 14 years or older staying for more than 30 days in the U.S. to be registered and potentially fingerprinted, unless otherwise exempted….

Source: Canadian snowbirds caught up in new registration requirements

Donald Trump’s Team Takes First Steps To Cut Legal Immigration

Helpful analysis:

Donald Trump reduced legal immigration in his first term, and his team has taken the first steps to do so again. As president, Trump enacted policies that blocked hundreds of thousands of people from immigrating to the United States. Courts stopped some of the most restrictive proposals, but those measures could reemerge in 2025. Economists warn that America faces declining labor force growth without increasing legal immigration. Higher economic growth and living standards will become more challenging if the United States welcomes fewer legal immigrants.

Legal Immigration Declined During Trump’s First Term

Using the president’s authority and restrictive administrative measures, Trump officials reduced the number of legal immigrants admitted to the United States during his first term. According to a National Foundation for American Policy analysis, “If the FY 2016 level had continued during the four years of the Trump administration, approximately 770,000 more individuals would have immigrated legally to the United States.”

The analysis points out the numbers understate the decline because legal immigration rose for three straight years before Donald Trump became president. “The annual level of legal immigration declined by 13% (or 151,740) between FY 2016 and FY 2019 and 40% (or 476,143) between FY 2016 and FY 2020. That decline continued in FY 2021, almost four months of which took place during the Trump administration.”

While Covid-19 reduced admissions in the second half of FY 2020 (the fiscal year ended on September 30, 2020), the Trump administration furthered the reduction by stopping almost all immigrants from entering the United States. In April 2020, Donald Trump issued a proclamation that blocked the entry of all categories of immigrants, including employment-based, except the spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens, certain medical personnel and individuals whose entry would be in the “national interest.”

A few months later, Trump issued another proclamation that blocked the entry of H-1B, H-2B, L-1 and most J-1 temporary visa holders through December 31, 2020. In an NFAP study, University of North Florida economics professor Madeline Zavodny concluded that the Covid-19 pandemic and Trump administration policies reduced H-1B and J-1 visas but did not help U.S. workers. “The drop in H-2B program admissions did not boost labor market opportunities for U.S. workers but rather, if anything, worsened them.”

Early Actions To Reduce Legal Immigration

On January 25, 2025, Donald Trump signed an executive order stopping all refugee admissions into the United States. In FY 2021, the Biden administration surpassed 100,000 refugee admissions. The executive order structured the process such that Stephen Miller, deputy chief of staff for policy and the president’s homeland security advisor, receives a report from cabinet officials. Refugee admissions could resume in several months, or it is possible that no refugees will come to America during Donald Trump’s second term.

Nearly 300,000 more refugees would have entered the United States in Trump’s first term if Miller had not fought to suspend refugee admissions and then lower them to historically low levels. The 18,000-ceiling for FY 2020 was 84% lower than the 110,000 limit set in the last year of the Obama administration. The lower refugee admissions did not appear right away in immigration statistics since refugees file for permanent residence a year after entry, and many arrived before Trump took office.

In February 2025, the State Department announced a new policy that will increase visa wait times at U.S. consulates by narrowing the grounds for waiving interviews. Applicants are eligible to waive visa interviews if they “previously held a visa in the same category that expired less than 12 months prior to the new application . . . and apply in their country of nationality or residence, have never been refused a visa (unless such refusal was overcome or waived) and have no apparent or potential ineligibility.”

According to Dagmar Butte of Parker Butte, “The effect is to delay the ability of people to return to the U.S. who have approved petitions if they are changing visa categories. The wait times for interviews at many consulates are quite long.”

A January 20, 2025, executive order set the stage for a new version of the “Muslim ban.” The order states that within 60 days, various officials will submit a report to identify countries “for which vetting and screening information is so deficient as to warrant a partial or full suspension on the admission of nationals from those countries.” More broadly, the executive order calls for officials to “Evaluate all visa programs to ensure that they are not used by foreign nation-states or other hostile actors to harm the security, economic, political, cultural, or other national interests of the United States.”

“We are starting to see signs of the impact of the president’s ‘extreme vetting’ policy,” said Dan Berger of Green & Spiegel. “Officers are increasingly comparing what the individual says and has on electronic devices to other agency records and what’s on the internet. That is fair, but recently we have seen minor inconsistencies lead to denied entry.” He said it has become more difficult to tell temporary visa holders whether it is safe to travel.

A Federal Register notice announced that because of the executive order “Protecting the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats,” USCIS must implement “rigorous vetting and screening of all grounds of inadmissibility or bases for the denial of immigration- related benefits.” As a result, “Execution of the E.O. requires USCIS to collect Social Media Identifier(s) on immigration forms and/or information collection systems.”

The Trump administration also plans to end parole for several hundred thousand individuals sponsored for humanitarian parole and terminate Temporary Protected Status for Haitians, Venezuelans and others.

Using “Public Charge” To Reduce Legal Immigration

During Donald Trump’s first term, the administration published a “public charge” rule that could have lowered legal immigration levels by raising income and resource requirements for immigrants well beyond current law. Although the rule was not in effect for long due to legal action and injunctions, when the State Department followed its parameters, it contributed to reduced immigration. Admissions in the Immediate Relatives category fell by 7% between FY 2017 and FY 2018, and temporary visas for a K-1 Fiancé(e) of U.S. Citizen declined by 10,122 or 29%.

The public charge rule was an “obsession” for Stephen Miller, according to New York Times journalists Julie Hirschfeld Davis and Michael D. Shear. Immigrants are generally ineligible for means-tested federal benefits programs unless they have worked in the United States for five years or longer in a lawful status. (State program eligibility may vary.)

The Biden administration eliminated the Trump rule and followed that by publishing its own public charge rule. The new Trump administration would need to start from the beginning on “public charge.” Trump officials must contend with the Supreme Court’s decision to end Chevron deference to federal agencies, which could help lawsuits against new measures that go beyond U.S. immigration law or regulatory authority. The Trump administration’s public charge rule read like a bill in Congress, such as by establishing income requirements that do not appear in the Immigration and Nationality Act.

In October 2019, Donald Trump issued an executive order barring immigrants from the United States without proof of health insurance or the means to buy it. The order was a pretext to block immigrants rather than an attempt to reform public health policy. Although not in effect long due to legal action, a return of the order could decimate legal admissions. The Migration Policy Institute estimated that up to 400,000 immigrants a year could be denied entry under such a mandate. It could return during a second Trump administration.

Due to the lengthy family preference backlogs, administrative measures to restrict legal immigration are most likely to reduce admissions each year in categories without numerical limits, especially the “Immediate Relatives” of U.S. citizens (i.e., spouses, parents and children under 21). Approximately 200,000 fewer Immediate Relatives of U.S. citizens immigrated between FY 2017 and 2019 than if admissions remained at the same level as FY 2016. The entry ban on people from several Muslim-majority countries contributed to the decline.

Given the passage of the Laken Riley Act with Democratic support, Stephen Miller and other Trump officials will likely hope they can pass a bill through Congress that reduces legal immigration. One can expect efforts by Miller and colleagues to block the entry of Diversity Visa and family-sponsored immigrants through regulation or presidential proclamation or to eliminate the categories through legislation.

Washington Post columnist Marc Thiessen recently wrote, “Trump is a strong supporter of legal immigration.” He cites Trump’s campaign promise to offer green cards to international students who graduate from U.S. universities. Donald Trump showed no signs of wanting to increase legal immigration in his first term. Trump’s team has already taken steps to reduce legal immigration to the United States in his second term.

Source: Donald Trump’s Team Takes First Steps To Cut Legal Immigration

Immigration irrégulière: Dans les cahiers secrets des passeurs

Interesting insights into cross-border people smugglers and traffickers:

L’enquête sur ce réseau de passeurs d’une ampleur inusitée au Québec a bénéficié de la collaboration étroite entre les services frontaliers du Canada et ceux des États-Unis. Ironiquement, elle pourrait connaître son dénouement alors que le président Donald Trump accuse toujours le Canada de ne pas être assez proactif en matière de sécurité frontalière.

Les carnets saisis par l’Agence des services frontaliers du Canada (ASFC) sur deux dirigeants de l’organisation à Montréal se sont avérés une mine d’information inespérée. Dans des centaines de pages de documents judiciaires déposés devant les tribunaux, les enquêteurs dressent leurs constats sur les ramifications du réseau actif dans trois pays. Selon eux :

  • L’organisation criminelle mexicaine compte une dizaine de collaborateurs connus à Montréal, dont plusieurs ont des liens familiaux ;
  • Elle organise la traversée clandestine de la frontière dans les deux sens : du Québec vers les États-Unis et vice-versa ;
  • Elle collecte entre 5000 $ et 6000 $ par passage, ce qui lui a rapporté au moins 1 million de dollars en sept mois ;
  • Elle serait aussi active dans le trafic de stupéfiants ;
  • Elle est soupçonnée d’être liée aux cartels de la drogue.

Le dossier revêt une importance particulière pour l’ASFC, qui n’a pas l’habitude de se frotter à des réseaux de passeurs aussi prolifiques.

« Je serais porté à dire que c’est le plus gros, ou celui qui semble le plus structuré. Je vais faire attention, parce qu’on est encore en train d’enquêter, mais c’est dans les plus gros qu’on a eus dans la région du Québec », affirme en entrevue Tony Dos Santos, directeur adjoint responsable des enquêtes criminelles de l’ASFC pour le Québec.

Nouvelle réalité avec la fermeture du chemin Roxham

La Presse a obtenu des copies des précieux cahiers de comptabilité, déposées en preuve au tribunal de l’immigration. Tout y était soigneusement consigné : les noms des clients ayant eu recours aux services de l’organisation, leurs numéros de téléphone, les coordonnées d’un ami ou d’un membre de leur famille qui servait de « caution », les montants payés, la date de leur passage, la liste des recruteurs sur le sol mexicain et des complices du côté américain.

“C’est rare qu’on a de la preuve comme ça ! Je vais être franc, on ne voit plus ça, en 2024, des calepins de ce genre avec des inscriptions. C’est un cas vraiment old school.”

 Tony Dos Santos, directeur adjoint responsable des enquêtes criminelles de l’ASFC pour le Québec

L’agence constate une recrudescence du recours à des groupes de passeurs organisés depuis deux ans. Autrefois, les migrants pouvaient se rendre jusqu’au chemin Roxham, traverser à pied et demander l’asile au Canada sur place. La fermeture du chemin Roxham en 2023 a changé la donne. « Maintenant, ils doivent carrément entrer de façon illégale, attendre et se cacher 14 jours au Canada avant de lever la main et de demander le statut de réfugié, sinon on les renvoie aux États-Unis », explique M. Dos Santos. Le recours aux groupes de passeurs organisés a augmenté en conséquence.

« Ce type d’organisation criminelle est impitoyable et menace souvent les consommateurs s’ils ne payent pas, ou les place dans une situation vulnérable », précise un rapport de l’ASFC déposé en preuve…

Source: Immigration irrégulière Dans les cahiers secrets des passeurs

Meggs – Immigration : Un système simple pour atteindre nos objectifs

Meggs advocating for a return to one-step immigration for most temporary residents with more limited and focussed pathways for international students, possibly linked to priority fields of study:

Les règles et les mécanismes d’application d’une politique publique déterminent sa réussite. La politique d’immigration ne fait pas d’exception.

Il est critique que ces règles soient claires, transparentes, simples et équitables, tant pour les personnes qui veulent venir au Québec, que pour les communautés qui les accueillent et surtout pour que le gouvernement puisse bien planifier les arrivées et l’intégration.

L’immigration permanente à une étape

Depuis la fin des années 1960, l’encadrement administratif du système d’immigration canadien, adopté en très grande partie aussi par le gouvernement du Québec tel que reflété dans l’Accord Canada-Québec en 1991, atteignait assez bien ces objectifs de simplicité, de transparence et d’équité.

Pour immigrer et travailler de manière permanente au pays, la demande était faite de l’étranger. Elle était évaluée selon une grille de sélection accordant des points pour certaines caractéristiques neutres liées surtout aux objectifs démographiques, économiques, culturels et linguistiques du gouvernement.

Le dossier devait démontrer un minimum de points pour que la personne soit sélectionnée, privilégiant ainsi des candidatures hautement qualifiées. Si c’était le cas, un certificat de sélection (CSQ) était émis par le Québec et la personne sélectionnée faisait une demande de résidence permanente auprès du fédéral. La résidence permanente est accordée, à moins qu’une vérification de sécurité ou de santé donne lieu à un refus d’entrée.

Munies du CSQ et de la confirmation de résidence permanente, la personne et sa famille, s’il y a lieu, entrent au pays. Le traitement des dossiers humanitaires et de réunification familiale, incluant le CSQ et la résidence permanente, était également largement fait avant l’arrivée au pays.

On l’appelle un système à une étape parce que la personne fait une demande et arrive au pays avec la résidence permanente. Il n’y a plus de démarches à faire pour demeurer au pays. Ces nouvelles personnes à statut permanent ont tous les mêmes devoirs, incluant de payer les impôts, que les personnes avec la citoyenneté et presque tous les mêmes droits. Elles ont accès à tous les services et programmes publics, mais ne peuvent voter ou se présenter en élection.

L’immigration temporaire ou circulaire

Il y a toujours eu parallèlement des personnes qui obtenaient permission d’entrer au pays pour une période déterminée, par exemple le temps d’un programme d’études ou d’un contrat déterminé de travail (diplomates, professeurs d’université visiteurs, personnes embauchées pour un emploi saisonnier ou pour un projet d’un relativement court délai…).

Au Québec et au Canada, on utilise le terme immigration temporaire pour décrire ces situations. Sur la scène internationale, on entend souvent l’expression « immigration circulaire » ou même « migration circulaire », ce qui décrit plus précisément la nature de ces mouvements.

À ne pas mêler les deux
Les fausses attentes

Le système d’immigration devient moins clair et transparent quand on laisse entendre explicitement ou implicitement qu’un permis temporaire est une étape vers la résidence permanente. Les messages implicites se trouvent dans les programmes d’immigration permanente visant les personnes immigrantes déjà au pays, les permis de travail temporaires délivrés pour combler des postes permanents, un permis de travail ouvert offert aux partenaires des personnes avec certains types permis temporaire, ou la possibilité de renouveler plusieurs fois un permis temporaire.

Plus directes sont les promesses explicites de la résidence permanente faites par des acteurs malveillants ou mal renseignés lors du recrutement des personnes à l’étranger pour un emploi « temporaire » ou pour études.

Ce contexte crée des attentes normales que la sélection par le Québec et la résidence permanente suivront presqu’automatiquement si on réussit à arriver avec un permis temporaire. Pourtant les programmes d’immigration permanente demeurent assez contingentés en fonction des objectifs politiques adoptés.

Ces attentes donnent lieu aux situations dramatiques des ménages établis depuis plusieurs années confrontés à un permis temporaire qui expire, sans renouvellement possible et sans chemin vers la résidence permanente.

Des étapes d’intégration reportées

Mêler l’immigration permanente et circulaire crée aussi les défis à une prise en charge rapide et efficace de l’État en vue des services d’intégration économique, socioculturelle et linguistique.

Les services d’intégration et de la francisation ont été élaborés en fonction des personnes arrivant avec la résidence permanente. Le Service d’accueil à l’aéroport du MIFI reçoit des personnes avec un CSQ.

Cette équipe leur souhaite la bienvenue, met à jour leurs coordonnées, leur explique certains aspects de la vie au Québec, comme l’obligation d’envoyer leurs enfants à l’école française, et leur offre immédiatement un rendez-vous pour obtenir leur carte RAMQ, ainsi que l’occasion de s’inscrire dans les services d’intégration et de francisation, au besoin, à proximité du lieu où ils comptent s’établir.

Cette prise en charge rapide est importante. Le transfert linguistique vers le français de la majorité des allophones se fait avant l’arrivée ou dans les cinq ans suivant l’arrivée. De plus, la formation obligatoire sur les valeurs québécoises ne s’applique qu’au moment de la demande d’immigration permanente.

Les personnes avec un permis de travail temporaire ne sont pas prises en charge à l’aéroport par l’équipe du ministère. Elles exigeraient de toute manière un service d’accueil spécifique parce que le type de permis détermine les services gouvernementaux auxquels ils ont droit.

Ces personnes peuvent envoyer leurs enfants à des écoles publiques anglaises pendant trois ans. C’est l’employeur ou le programme d’étude qui détermine si une connaissance du français est requise. Quel niveau et quel type de service d’intégration et de francisation sont les plus pertinents pour des personnes qui n’ont pas l’intention de s’établir au Québec ou qui ne seront vraisemblablement pas admissibles à un programme d’immigration permanente?

Les coûts et les ennuis pour tout le monde

L’immigration permanente à deux étapes – un permis temporaire suivi d’une demande sur place d’un CSQ et de la résidence permanente – coûte plus cher et complexifie énormément la vie de tout le monde concerné.

Il y a moult procédures et coûts liés à l’obtention d’un premier permis d’études ou de travail, dont la grande majorité exige des démarches auprès des deux gouvernements. Il y a question du meilleur choix parmi la multitude de permis de travail possibles, chacun avec ses propres conditions d’obtention et modalités de renouvellement.

Certains permettent de se faire accompagner par une ou un partenaire, d’autres non. Parfois, un des deux conjoints aurait une meilleure chance à obtenir le permis que l’autre. Il y a aussi la décision du programme d’immigration permanente le plus prometteur et le permis temporaire qui permet d’en remplir ses conditions. (Parce que le nombre de programmes d’immigration a augmenté aussi.)

Quand le premier permis expire, est-il renouvelable? Sinon, y a-t-il un autre type de permis qui permettra de rester sur place?

Plus les règles et processus sont complexes, plus les personnes sont obligées de tourner vers les intermédiaires pour de l’aide, ce qui ouvre la porte à de l’exploitation et de l’abus avant et même après l’arrivée. Avec le système à une étape, il y a plus de chance qu’une personne éduquée soit en mesure de compléter la demande toute seule ou avec l’aide du service à la clientèle du ministère.

De plus, les agissements des acteurs malveillants dans le processus de recrutement ou dans les conditions de travail font en sorte que de nouvelles conditions et mécanismes de surveillance gouvernementaux sont nécessaires, augmentant encore la bureaucratie et les dépenses. Tous les contribuables finissent par payer plus cher.

Les employeurs aussi peuvent ne pas saisir toutes les répercussions liées à l’embauche du personnel de l’étranger à statut temporaire, tant pour les personnes recrutées que pour l’entreprise.

Clarifier l’encadrement administratif pour faciliter la planification

Faire la distinction claire entre l’immigration permanente et l’immigration circulaire simplifierait la planification pluriannuelle. Le nombre de personnes venant pour s’établir serait beaucoup plus prévisible. Le nombre de personnes à statut précaire serait grandement réduit. Et les résidents non permanents n’affecteraient plus la taille de la population parce qu’ils seraient justement non permanents.

Source: Immigration : Un système simple pour atteindre nos objectifs

Trump’s early immigration enforcement record, by the numbers

Good set of data from the first month:

….The Trump administration has struggled to increase deportation levels even as it has opened up new pathways to deport migrants of other nationalities to Mexico and Central America.

Trump deported 37,660 people during his first month in office, Reuters reported in February, far less than the monthly average of 57,000 removals and returns in the last full year of Biden’s administration.

The figures include both ICE “removals” and more informal U.S. Customs and Border Protection “returns” to Mexico.

A senior Trump administration official and experts said deportations were poised to rise in coming months as countries accept more deportees. But initial figures suggested Trump could struggle to match higher deportation rates during the last full year of the Biden administration when large numbers of migrants were caught crossing illegally, making them easier to deport.

The Trump administration has not yet released detailed deportation data that would show how many of those deported were arrested by ICE in the interior of the U.S., as opposed to those arrested at the border and quickly processed for deportation.

The Trump administration rolled back Biden-era extensions of Temporary Protected Status for people from more than 1 million people from Venezuela and Haiti, potentially broadening the pool of people who could be deported.

The Trump administration swiftly struck or expanded agreements with Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, Panama, and Costa Rica to take deportees from other nations. The deportations to Panama have raised concerns about treatment of the migrants, including that of more than 100 sent to a camp near the Darien Gap jungle.

Trump ordered the U.S. military to assist with deportation operations, leading to military deportation flights to Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, Ecuador, Peru and India.

Source: Trump’s early immigration enforcement record, by the numbers

Canada Curbed Illegal Migration to the U.S. Now People Are Heading to Canada.

Sort of inevitable that increased security patrols mean further persons found. No major uptick to date, February data should be out shortly:

…Canada has directed 1.3 billion Canadian dollars ($900 million) to enhance border security, adding two Black Hawk helicopters and 60 drones equipped with thermal cameras.

It also tightened requirements for temporary visas that some visitors used to arrive in Canada legally but then enter the United States illegally.

The Canadian government says its recent measures have driven down the number of unauthorized crossings into the United States: About 600 migrants were intercepted at the border in January, down from about 900 in January 2024, according to U.S. data.

“Whether or not some of the allegations about what is going on at the border are accurate or not, or credible or not, I don’t have the luxury not to take it seriously,” Marc Miller, Canada’s immigration minister, said in an interview on Thursday.

…The Opposite Direction

Canada’s focus on the border, against the backdrop of Mr. Trump’s domestic crackdown on migrants, is why the nine people walking into Alberta on Feb. 3 raised alarms: It was unusual to see a group this large crossing on foot in the heart of winter. The presence of young children made it all the more troubling.

The Canadian authorities say they have been intercepting more people arriving from the United States, but because of the schedule Canada follows in releasing data, no numbers are yet available for the weeks since Mr. Trump’s inauguration in January. But government news releases suggest the numbers are rising….

“This is the latest sign that Canada is sending people and families with children back to the U.S. with the full knowledge that they are at great risk of being detained and then returned to danger,” said Ketty Nivyabandi, a leader of Amnesty International’s Canada chapter, referring to the nine migrants Canada returned to the United States. 

“The Canadian government must not wait a minute longer to withdraw from the Safe Third Country Agreement,” she added.

But such a move would likely encourage more people to seek refuge in Canada, creating new pressures on the country’s already strained immigration system.

“It would almost certainly lead to a surge in unauthorized border crossings,” said Phil Triadafilopoulos, a political science professor at the University of Toronto.

Still, he added, by continuing to return asylum seekers to the United States, Canada is signaling that “it isn’t going to receive people who have lost their temporary protected status in the U.S. as hospitably as it did in the past.”

And as illustrated by the migrants who crossed in Alberta, those groups, he said, can “include small children in really dire conditions, with the full knowledge that the fate of those children and their families is highly uncertain.”

Mr. Miller, the immigration minister, insisted that Canada believes that the United States remains a safe country for asylum seekers.

“We need to have a proper, managed system at the border,” he said. “But it doesn’t mean that we’re naïve, or we’re not watching events that are currently happening in the U.S.”…

Source: Canada Curbed Illegal Migration to the U.S. Now People Are Heading to Canada.

Canada Case Study Explores the Limits of Immigration to Ease Demographic Decline

Good and relevant study by Dan Hiebert on the need for realism and a shift towards population policy framework:

High-income countries globally face a stark demographic transition as their populations age and fertility rates decline, with key implications for productivity and the maintenance of retiree benefits if tax bases decline as workforces shrink. Questions remain about how and to what extent immigration can help slow this transition and soften the impact on labor markets. 

Canada offers a unique vantage point on the role that immigration can play in easing demographic decline—and the potential drawbacks. Over the past decade, rising permanent and temporary migration accounted for the entirety of Canada’s labor force growth. But the rapid pace of change has come with challenges. By 2024, Canada’s historic embrace of immigration had cooled amid public concerns about its impact on housing costs and public services. 

In a new report out today for the Migration Policy Institute’s Transatlantic Council on Migration, respected Canadian researcher Daniel Hiebert investigates the efficacy of immigration in addressing population change and the old-age dependency ratio. The report examines Canada’s demographic challenges (its total fertility rate of 1.26 children per woman is among the lowest rates globally) and recent changes in migration policymaking before exploring the consequences of setting immigration rates at different levels. The report uses six scenarios for admissions and population projections over the next half-century that were commissioned from Statistics Canada. 

The report finds that while the six scenarios, which range from high- to near net-zero immigration, would produce very different overall population sizes by 2046 and 2071, the old-age dependency ratio would rise even under the highest immigration rate. “These scenarios point to an important lesson: Immigration can grow the population and slow the effects of falling fertility, but it is less efficient at changing the age composition of the population,” writes Hiebert, emeritus professor of geography at the University of British Columbia. That is because immigrants themselves age and eventually retire alongside their native-born peers. 

To tackle the rising old-age dependency ratio and the prospect of shrinking workforces, policymakers would need to also consider other interventions, such as raising the retirement age, Hiebert writes. 

The report, Understanding the Impact of Immigration on Demography: A Canadian Case Study, argues that for immigration policy to effectively tackle Canada’s challenges, policymakers will need to frame a long-term strategy that considers a number of intertwining realities, including: 

  • Calibrating immigrant admissions together with decisions about social spending and investment in housing stock and infrastructure. 
  • Taking a longer lens than the standard three-year population plan, given the consequences of changing immigration targets play out over decades. This also means recognizing the need for different policy interventions as “fast” regions such as large cities face pressures on housing and infrastructure from above-average population growth, while “slow” regions such as rural areas will need help navigating depopulation and rising old-age dependency ratios. 
  • Effectively communicating with the public to set appropriate expectations for immigration. 

“Canada is frequently seen as an exceptional case, globally, with a population that has been willing—enthusiastic, even—to accommodate a relatively high rate of immigration. This consensus has become frail and the Canadian government (like others around the world) has changed its tone on immigration, acknowledging that there are costs to immigration-led population growth,” Hiebert writes. “Nevertheless, demographic challenges are resolute and ignoring them will, eventually, also carry economic and political consequences.” 

While few governments globally have clearly and forcefully articulated the unprecedented levels of old-age dependency that are looming, and the resulting painful economic adjustments ahead, embarking on a national conversation around demography, engaging with the tough policy trade-offs involved and building a population strategy could help raise Canadian public awareness, the author concludes.

Read the report here: www.migrationpolicy.org/research/immigration-demography-canada

Source: Canada Case Study Explores the Limits of Immigration to Ease Demographic Decline

Canada announces new measures for emergency visa program for Ukrainians affected by war

Expected:

The federal government says Ukrainians who arrived in Canada under a special program set up after Russia invaded their country will have more time to apply for a new open work permit.

Immigration Minister Marc Miller announced Thursday that Ukrainians residing in this country under the Canada-Ukraine Authorization for Emergency Travel (CUAET) as of March 31, 2024, will now have an extra year to apply for the new open work permit. The change extends the deadline to apply to March 31, 2026, from March 31, 2025, and the visa will be valid for up to three years.

Ukrainians who arrived under CUAET will also be able to renew an existing work permit by that deadline or apply for a study permit, subject to standard fees.

“These temporary measures will allow Ukrainians and their family members to continue to work and study in Canada during this difficult time and eventually return home when it is safe to do so,” Mr. Miller said in a statement….

Source: Canada announces new measures for emergency visa program for Ukrainians affected by war

Canada prioritizes new occupations for permanent residence

Of note:

Ottawa has added teachers’ assistants, early childhood educators, and cooks, among others, to a list of occupations prioritized in the selection of skilled immigrants for permanent residence in 2025.

The Immigration Department introduced the “category-based selection” — better known as the “targeted draw” of skilled immigrants — in June 2023 to better align newcomers with Canada’s labour market needs by prioritizing candidates in specific occupational sectors.

In additional to focusing on candidates with strong French language proficiency, the system targets those in the talent pool with a background in five occupational sectors: health care; science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) professions; trades such as carpenters, plumbers and contractors; transport; and agriculture and agri-food.

On Thursday, officials removed the entire transport category and added the education sector, which includes roles such as kindergarten, elementary and secondary teachers’ assistants to teachers, early childhood educators and instructors for persons with disabilities, among others.

The list of eligible occupations has been updated, with new roles added and some removed from each category.

For instance, the health care category has been expanded to cover new health care and social services occupations, as well as various technologist and technician jobs…

Source: Canada prioritizes new occupations for permanent residence

Trump Administration Bends U.S. Government in Extraordinary Ways towards Aim of Mass Deportations

Good analysis by MPI:

Invoking the specter of “invasion,” the Trump administration has set out to build a fundamentally new, all-of-government machinery to fulfill President Donald Trump’s campaign promise of mass deportations of resident unauthorized immigrants and new irregular arrivals.

To carry out this enterprise, the administration has enlisted federal agencies such as the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) that have previously never played significant roles—or any, in the case of the IRS—in immigration enforcement. It also has directed other federal law enforcement entities, including prosecutors, to prioritize deportations. And it has significantly increased the military’s involvement by deploying sizeable numbers of troops to the U.S.-Mexico border, for the first time using military aircraft to carry out deportation flights, and, also in a first, detaining noncitizens arrested inside the United States at the U.S. military facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Reaching beyond the federal ambit, the administration is also doubling down on its pressure on state and local authorities to conduct immigration enforcement actions traditionally reserved for federal agents, and is seeking or threatening to penalize those that offer resistance. And it has made cooperation on immigration a high priority in foreign affairs, taking an iron-fist approach to negotiations with foreign counterparts. Facing U.S. threats to impose tariffs, end foreign assistance, and take over the Panama Canal, Mexico and a number of other Latin American countries have agreed to implement migration controls, with some also agreeing to hold third-country nationals removed from the United States. So far, these countries have sought to appease the Trump administration, but policy implementation has been measured and strategic. Mexico, for example, has refused to accept deportees arriving on military planes and has also threatened reciprocal tariffs on U.S. imports should the Trump administration impose tariffs as early as March 4.

Finally, the administration has achieved something that several of its predecessors could not: Getting Congress to act on immigration legislation. The White House scored a victory when, within a few days of the inauguration, Congress in a bipartisan fashion passed the Laken Riley Act, the first stand-alone immigration legislation in nearly two decades. The law dramatically increases mandatory detention of noncitizens accused of certain criminal offenses.

The orchestrated, whole-of-government machinery displayed by this administration in its first month—accompanied by a muscular, carefully crafted messaging campaign—has the closest parallels with the actions that occurred in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, when broad swaths of the federal government were repurposed to serve the national security mission. The fundamental difference is that post-9/11 actions were a response to an actual attack on U.S. soil, whereas today’s rhetoric of “invasion” and the arrival of foreign “military-age” men intent on building an “army” is not matched by reality. While encounters of asylum seekers and other migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border reached record levels in fiscal year (FY) 2021 and FY 2022, there is no evidence so far of a significant threat to national security or general public safety. And, in fact, irregular crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border significantly declined during 2024, and in particular during the latter half of the calendar year….

Source: Trump Administration Bends U.S. Government in Extraordinary Ways towards Aim of Mass Deportations